71-.2 73
I-3 ally Growth of Douglas-Fir
cF. 2
in a Reciprocal Planting
By Kim K. Ching
Research Paper
3
August 1965
C1%
A
G
Nt"n a N\
'
\' i5
CON
Forest Management Research
FOREST RESEARCH LABORATORY
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY
Corvallis
FOREST RESEARCH LABORATORY
The Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University, is
part of the Forest Research Division of the Agricultural Experiment
Station. The industry-supported program of the Laboratory is aimed at
improving and expanding values from timberlands of the State.
A team of forest scientists is investigating problems of growing
and protecting the timberland crop, while wood scientists endeavor to
make the most of the material produced.
The current report stems
PURPOSE
.
.
from studies of forest
management.
.
Develop the full potential of Oregon's timber resource by:
increasing productiveness of forest lands with improved practices.
improving timber quality through intensified management and selection of superior trees.
reducing losses from fire, insects, and diseases--thus saving timber for products and jobs.
Keep development of the forest resource in harmony with development of
other Oregon resources.
I
PROGRAM
..
REGENERATION through studies of producing, collecting, extracting,
cleaning,
storing, and germinating seed, and growing, estab-
-
lishing, and protecting seedlings for new forests.
YOUNG-GROWTH MANAGEMENT through studies of growth and develop-
ment of trees, quality of growth, relationship of soils to growth,
methods of thinning, and ways of harvesting to grow improved
trees.
FOREST PROTECTION through studies of weather and forest fire behavfor to prevent fires, of diseases and insects to save trees, and of
animals to control damage to regrowth.
TREE IMPROVEMENT through studies of variation, selection, inheriLance,
and breeding.
CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY .
.
.
2
.
.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
INTRODUCTION ... . . . . . . . . .
Design of experimental plots .. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
.
RESULTS AND OBSERVATION. . .
Survival . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
Growth in height. . . .
.
.
.
. .
LITERATURE CITED.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
3
.
.
.
.
. . .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
.
.
...
.
.
DISCUSSION .
.
.
.
.
.
Assessment.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. . .
.
. .
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. . . . . .
.
.
. 3
5
.
.
.
.
.
.6
.
.6
6
. . . .
. . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
19
.
.
.
.20
.
.
.
.
.
.
SUMMARY
Survival and growth during three years at 8 out-planting areas
are reported for Douglas-fir from 14 sources of seed.
Early survival was highest near Nimpkish on Vancouver Island.
At most plantations, trees from the local seed source grew as well as
did those from the best three sources. Trees from seed collected at
northern and southern extremes of the study grew least in the three
years.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Cooperators with Oregon State University in furnishing land,
seed, labor, and supervision of plantations include:
British Columbia Forest Service
Canadian Forest Products, Ltd.
Crown Zellerbach Corporation
Washington Dept. of Natural Resources
Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd.
Jack Stump and Kenneth McCrae
MacMillan, Bloedel, and Powell River, Ltd.
Medford Corporation
Oregon State Board of Forestry
Simpson Olympic Tree Farm
University of British Columbia
United States Forest Service
Weyerhaeuser Company
2
Early Growth of Douglas -Fir in a Reciprocal Planting
by
Kim K. Ching
INTRODUCTION
Out-plantings of Douglas-fir at various locations in northwestern
United States and British Columbia will allow comparisons among trees
grown from seed collected near each location. Such comparisons may
demonstrate advantages of planting seed from certain sources in some
areas. Growth and survival after three years at selected plantations
are related here.
The importance of selecting the proper seed source for reforestation has been known to foresters for many years. Systematic experiments dealing with such a subject began as early as the nineteenth century (1)*. Studies of seed source in Douglas-fir have attracted a great
deal of attention since European countries began to introduce this timber
species. Information accumulated rapidly through the years from
Douglas-fir plantations established in Europe and the southern hemisphere as well as in the United States (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12) has provided a
wealth of knowledge to guide planting.
In the Northwest; private as well as public agencies have participated enthusiastically in this particular field of study. In 1954, staff of
the Research Division of the Oregon State Board of Forestry (now in the
Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University) began to plan a
region-wide provenance study of Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest.
Information on seed collection and results of growth of various groups of
Douglas-fir seedlings in the nursery were reported in Silvae Genetica
(3), January 1960. The current report deals with growth of these seedlings after they were out-planted.
Design of experimental plots
A reciprocal design for planting was adopted in this experiment.
Plantations were established at, or near, each seed-collection site
(Figure 1) so that seedlings of local provenance could be compared with
stock from other provenances.
Each out-planting area has two plantations, usually situated from
1/4 to 1/2 mile apart (Figure 2). A plantation occupies 5.69 acres and
consists of two blocks. Each block has 121 trees of each seed source
*Numbers in parentheses refer to similarly numbered references cited.
3
Nimpkish Forest.
Courtenay area.
Haney area.
Shelton area.
Elbe area.
Molalla area.
Salem area.
High prairie,
Oakridge.
127
Figure 1.
126
127
123
124
122
121
120
Locations of plantations in provenance study of
Douglas-fir. Arrows indicate those reported here.
4
13A
8A
14A
7A
4B
10B
1B
13B
6A
1A
4A
12A
9B
15B
5B
2B
15A
5A
11A
16
7B
8B
115
14B
9A
3A
12B
3B
6B
165
4D
12D
10A
2A
Plantation 1
11D
8 C
2C
16C
4C
16D
6D
352
88
5C
13C
9C
12C
5D
3D
7D
10D
11C
3C
15C
7C
1D
9D
13D
15D
'_H 88
F*--
-4I
-
Plantation 2
704
Figure 2. Arrangement of plots in plantations
for provenance study of Douglas-fir.
Dimensions shown are in feet.
with a spacing of 8 by 8 feet. Only the innermost 49 trees of each seed
provenance within the block were selected for measurement.
Assessment
First measurements in the field were made at the end of the first
growing season following out-planting in the spring of 1959. Subsequent
data were collected in the field in 1960 and 1961.
Examinations made on various plantations included the following
data: 1, survival; 2, current growth in height of terminals on each living tree; 3, total height of each living tree; 4, damage to trees by ani-
mal clipping, grouse nipping, or frost.
All these data were sent by each cooperator to the Forest Research Laboratory to be assembled, summarized, and analyzed.
5
RESULTS AND OBSERVATION
This progress report is restricted to information collected on
growth of seedlings of 14 seed sources in 8 of the original 16 outplanting areas. Selection of these planting sites for this report is based
on availability of data for at least two seasons in the field. Seedlings in
those areas that have been excluded were damaged heavily by mammals,
birds, or adverse climatic conditions. Damage by rabbits was found in
plantations supposedly with rabbit-proof fencing. In the Tillamook area,
Z7 percent of the provenance stock treated with animal repellent (Zag)
was destroyed two days after planting.
Survival
For three seasons, survival of trees of different provenances at
each plantation was recorded,whether or not they had been damaged by
animals or other environmental factors (Table 1). Where there were
dead trees in the first-year tally, the replaced trees were not tallied in
subsequent years; therefore. the percentage of surviving trees refers to
the originally planted trees.
There is no doubt that the plantation in the Nimpkish area on
Vancouver Island (area A) has the best planting site for establishment
of seedlings based on survival in early stages, regardless of the origin
of seed sources. In the Willamette valley of Oregon, the plantation in
area L showed much mortality the first year, and the trend continued
in following years. Only seedlings originating from three seed sources
(B, D, and P) maintained a fair amount of stock of the original planting
at area L. The other plantation on Vancouver Island (area B) had a
high rate of survival during the first and second years in the field, but
was damaged severely by deer in the third year. The plantation (area
E) maintained by the University of British Columbia at Haney, Canada,
suffered some damages by hares in the first year, but surviving trees
did very well subsequently. As for the plantations in areas K and 0 in
Oregon (high-elevation sites at Molalla and Oakridge), only the former
had more than half of the originally planted materials still growing vigorously after three years in the field.
Growth in height
In all plantations, damage to trees either by animals or by adverse climatic conditions was recorded. To assess the amount of damage that would retard growth of a tree, separate measurements of total
height were compiled for those trees that had never been damaged and
for those that suffered damage, but were alive when measured. Surprisingly, in most instances, "never damaged" trees were no more
than slightly different from those that had been damaged previously.
6
Trees that never were damaged are compared for 14 provenances in Table 2 with damaged trees at areas A, B, E, K, L, and O.
So few trees were undamaged at areas G and H that values given apply
to all living trees, damaged and undamaged together. Trees at each
area were ranked in height by seed source. Seed sources that produced
seedlings not significantly different in height when analyzed statistically
are grouped by brackets.
Significant differences in height existed among seedlings of different geographical origins at the end of the second growing season in
the Oregon State nursery. Seedlings from seed sources B, C, and D on
Vancouver Island and G near Shelton, Washington, were taller (at the
1 percent level of significance) than seedlings from other sources .
Trees from seed sources A and P (northernmost and southernmost)
were shortest of all the groups.
At the end of the third season in the field, trees from two Canadian seed sources, B and C, and from one near Shelton, Washington, G,
had grown outstandingly in height. In most plantations, trees of seed
sources A and P had grown least. Local seed sources at some planta-
tions produced seedlings that grew about as well in their own locale as
did seedlings B, C, and G, which were among the tallest at most plantations. Such relationships are illustrated in Figures 3-10, except that
local seed source is not shown for location E because these seedlings
were a year younger than the other trees. To avoid cluttering the
graphs, not all 14 seed sources are shown.
7
Table 1. Yearly Survival of Trees Planted in 1959 at Eight Locations. Percent, Based on Number Planted.
Seed
source
00
A. Nimpkish Forest.
B. Courtenay area.
1959
1960
1961
A
95
95
91
92
B
C
D
G
98
95
95
96
96
95
94
99
98
94
94
94
93
94
95
96
92
92
94
96
97
94
96
94
95
96
96
93
98
96
97
95
94
M
95
92
92
91
N
0
P
93
96
91
94
90
94
89
90
92
91
91
H
I
J
K
L
95
93
1959 -T-1960
91
96
1961
--'
89
97
--
97
--
88
E. Haney area.
I-9-59J-1960
G. Shelton area.
1961
1959
(
1960J-19-6-1
86
85
86
85
81
82
78
84
62
61
58
58
95
87
93
87
91
96
--
96
90
--
89
88
87
86
--
93
94
67
78
67
93
59
75
62
93
--
93
94
93
92
88
73
71
96
--
91
56
82
59
64
65
85
95
77
83
83
92
82
62
84
82
95
95
87
87
90
96
-------
91
94
90
89
90
87
90
88
88
87
86
88
94
94
92
92
88
85
83
85
91
81
91
91
61
63
68
54
81
81
Seed
source
10
A
43
B
C
75
D
G
H
71
1961
34
70
60
64
32
54
41
48
45
36
30
I
51
45
X40
J
40
28
K
64
33
53
L
46
41
35
M
50
44
N
0
P
1
H. Elbe area.
1959-1 1960
68
42
37
45
50
40
47
K. Molalla area.
1959
1960
1961
L. Salem area.
1959
1960_t1961
0. Oakridge.
1959
1960
1961
77
88
89
69
84
66
78
32
19
17
54
75
61
82
79
78
68
92
81
77
72
68
82
39
62
53
68
85
80
74
74
71
59
80
47
67
56
41
36
57
45
79
78
80
71
57
52
45
45
33
31
45
43
58
52
55
51
65
71
68
51
69
69
69
67
65
42
47
57
54
49
73
74
63
67
77
66
63
76
64
24
63
32
16
14
38
34
74
83
74
58
26
51
58
70
42
52
23
61
40
39
50
37
38
81
47
68
45
71
64
62
71
66
62
59
46
70
65
61
59
47
43
68
58
60
51
79
_
55
32
57
41
65
45
44
Trees at area B, near Courtenay, were damaged extensively by deer in 1961, and survival was not recorded that year.
Table 2. Growth in Height,in Centimeters, of Douglas-Fir of 14 Provenances at 8 Locations.
Seed Sources Not Significantly Different at Level Shown Are Bracketed.
1960
1959
Height
Seed
Rank source
Location
Seed
Un
damaged
Damaged
source
1
G
C
23.7
21.4
G
21.8
21.6
H
21.5
20.9
21.3
20.5
0
5
I
H
D
M
34.9
32.2
30.5
30.4
30.1
6
K
20.8
20.3
B
29.8
7
J
20.8
20.6
J
28.4
8
B
20.8
20.5
28.4
9
M
19.6
19.1
18.2
17.4
16.9
19.2
18.7
17.8
16.7
16.4
I
K
D
A
16.5
16.1
10
11
12
13
14
LSD
Seed
damaged
23.8
22.6
4
Height
UnDamaged
source
Un-
Damaged
damaged
A Nimpkish Forest.
2
3
1961
Hei &ht
0
A
L
P
N
C
L
P
N
2.57 (1% level)
28.2
27.7
26.4
25.0
24.0
22.2
4.51
35.1
G
58.8
59.0
31.7
30.4
30.3
C
0
52.6
51.0
51.0
52.3
50.3
51.1
29.4
28.9
H
B
50.8
48.5
50.7
47.4
27.9
28.2
27.2
27.3
26.0
24.4
23.5
D
48.4
46.3
44.7
44.0
43.9
43.5
40.6
35.4
46.9
45.3
44.4
42.6
43.5
42.0
40.4
21.9
(1%
M
J
I
K
A
L
P
N
level)
35.4
10.43 (1% level)
Location B Courtenay area.
.
1
C
28.1
2
G
3
J
27.8
27.1
26.5
D
1
25.5
26.2
24.7
22.4
C
G
J
1
41.2
40.1
39.2
38.4
1l
39.5
39.0
37.2
36.2
B
6
H
7
I
8
M
12
K
0
L
N
13
A
14
P
9
10
11
SD
25.7
25.5
25.4
25.2
24.7
22.6
22.0
21.6
21.4
23.7
24.4
24.0
22.6
23.7
21.0
20.3
20.2
20.6
D
20.6
5. 01 (1% level)
19.8
N
41.7
40.5
39.6
38.9
38.7
38.5
35.4
35.1
34.8
34.3
31.9
31.8
30.6
30.2
38.3
39.0
37.0
35.7
36.7
37.3
33.5
33.3
32.0
31.6
31.1
29.3
28.6
27.8
K
38.4
37.4
37.0
M
36.7
H
35.8
33.9
32.6
30.9
30.8
30.0
B
L
0
P
A
34.9
36.3
36.1
35.0
36.0
32.9
31.9
29.8
29.3
29.0
6.89 (5% level)
Location E Haney area.
1
C
2
G
3
B
4
I
6
K
H
7
J
8
D
5
9
10
11
12
13
M
A
P
N
0
14
L
LSD
No differences (5% level)
C
G
B
I
H
K
A
M
J
D
p
L
0
N
71.2
66.9
64.6
64.4
63.6
62.4
59.0
58.0
57.0
54.7
53.8
52.2
51.0
50.1
64.9
64.6
59.7
59.1
61.0
59.2
52.5
53.8
52.9
51.4
52.4
49.0
48.1
46.5
Table 2. (Continued)
1960
1959
Rank
Seed
source
Undamaged
Damaged
1961
Height
Height
Hei ght
Seed
source
UnI
damaged
UnSeed
Damaged source damaged
Damaged
Location G (damaged and undamaged live seedlings grouped together) Shelton area.
1
2
C
G
4
B
H
5
0
6
I
7
D
J
3
8
9
10
K
11
N
12
M
13
A
14
P
LSD
L
25.1
24.4
23.9
23.9
22.3
21.2
20.6
20.5
20.0
19.8
19.3
19.2
18.6
17.2
3.35 (1% level)
C
B
G
J
D
H
0
I
K
L
M
A
N
P
42.2
41.9
38.7
36.3
35.8
35.1
33.2
32.4
32.0
31.0
28.9
28.4
27.5
26.6
No difference (5% level)
L
64.8
54.5
53.3
50.9
50.3
49.7
48.8
45.4
45.2
44.3
42.2
A
36.1
P
N
35.9
32.6
14.48 (1% level)
C
G
M
H
B
0
K
I
D
J
Location H (damaged and undamaged live seedlings grouped together) Elbe area.
1
2
3
4
C
G
B
H
26.8
26.6
26.4
24.3
H
C
G
B
36.8
33.2
32.3
31.6 1
0
6
I
7
D
8
J
9
10
N
K
11
L
12
A
13
M
14
P
Location K Molalla area.
22.7
H
1
2
G
22.1
21.8
20.8
20.2
H
K
I
A
N
L
M
J
P
A
25.0
24.0
23.5
23.2
22.3
21.6
21.3
21.0
20.7
19.8
20.3
M
20.0
20.2
L
K
P
19.8
18.0
19.9
18.0
A
3
C
4
I
5
B
20.1
20.0
N
6
19.2
18.8
18.6
18.0
J
7
N
L
8
D
18.4
18.2
9
10
0
18.3
17.5
16.8
16.7
16.5
16.5
18.1
17.0
16.3
16.4
16.2
16.4
D
0
J
11
M
12
A
13
K
P
2.83 (1% level)
I
25.5
23.9
23.7
23.4
22.5
22.1
21.5
21.2
20.7
20.4
20.0
22.0
21.4
20.5
LSD
D
No difference (5% level)
LSD
14
0
23.1
22.5
22.5
22.0
21.9
21.7
21.5
21.2
20.2
19.0
I
G
C
B
L
4.54 (1% level)
H
G
C
D
B
M
0
K
J
N
P
28.1
27.8
27.4
1
26.7
26.1
25.2
25.1
24.9
22.6
22.0
9.63 (1% level)
31.7
31.7
30.7
30.6
29.3
28.3
31.8
30.7
30.5
30.2
29.4
28.2
27.2
26.8
26.0
25.9
25.9
25.3
24.9
22.7
26.9
26.7
26.0
Z5.3
25.7
24.4
24.7
22.5
6.93 (1% level)
Table 2. (Continued)
1959
Seed
Rank source
Height
Hei ht
Undamaged
1961
1960
Hei ht
Seed
Damaged source
Undamaged
Seed
Un
Damaged source damaged
Damaged
'1_.ocation L Salem area.
1
D
C
26.3
25.7
25.7
25.9
D
2
3
B
25.4
25.3
B
4
G
L
6
H
7
1
23.0
22.3
21.8
21.6
24.6
18.8
21.7
21.1
I
5
8
21.4
20.8
H
20.3
18.2
11
J
20.7
19.4
19.2
19.2
17.8
17.4
K
1 0
0
K
N
18.5
19.1
17.5
16.9
J
9
2
M
3
A
4
P
D'
5.62 (1% level)
C
G
0
M
L
P
A
N
44.0
40.7
38.5
35.7
34.9
34.4
34.0
44.0
40.7
39.3
34.9
34.2
34.1
33.1
33.6
32.8
30.9
34.8
32.7
31.7
29.9
27.5
26.7
26.0
30.2
26.9
25.8
25.1
11.64 (1% level)
D
C
B
G
I
M
H
0
K
J
P
L
A
N
74.2
67.6
62.4
60.1
59.3
57.6
57.0
53.8
53.7
51.5
44.0
42.4
42.2
41.7
18.22 (1% level)
74.1
67.3
62.7
59.8
59.1
57.1
56.9
53.3
54.3
51.1
44.1
41.6
41.2
40.6
Location 0 High prairie, Oakridge.
C
3
G
D
4
B
5
H
6
0
7
J
8
L
9
M.
10
11
K
N
12
I
13
P
14
A
2
LSD
28.6
28.3
28.3
28.1
26.1
24.9
24.3
23.9
23.3
22.3
21.6
21.4
20.3
18.9
6.94 (1% level)
26.4
25.2
27.5
26.3
25.8
23.8
23.6
22.9
22.7
21.8
21.4
20.9
20.5
18.4
D
B
C
G
H
J
M
0
A
L
I
K
N
P
42.7
41.5
40.1
39.9
38.9
37.3
37.2
37.0
36.0
35.4
35.2
34.4
32.6
30.1
42.3
39.7
39.0
36.9
38.6
37.0
36.7
35.9
35.2
34.5
35.0
34.4
32.5
29.7
No difference (5% level)
ANNUAL GROWTH
AT PLANTATIONS
IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
60
50
Dotted lines indicate
local seed source
10
60
0
1957
1958
#959
1960
1961
Figure 3. Nimpkish Forest.
50
40
70
,30
60
20
50
10
240
0
1957
z
1958
1959
1960
1961
Figure 4. Courtenay area.
X30
x
0
S
20
10
0
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
Figure 5. Haney area.
16
ANNUAL GROWTH AT PLANTATIONS IN WASHINGTON
Dotted lines indicate local seed source
70
60
1957
1958
1959
1960
20
1961
Figure 6. Shelton area.
10
0
Figure 7. Elbe area.
17
ANNUAL GROWTH
AT PLANTATIONS
IN OREGON
Dotted lines indicate
local seed source
70
60
1957
1958
Figure 8.
1959
1960
1961
Molalla area.
50
W
2 40
TO
60
10
0
1957
1958
Figure 9.
20
10
0
1957
Figure 10.
1958
1959
1960
1961
High prairie, Oakridge.
18
1959
1960
1961
Salem area.
DISCUSSION
Wakeley (10) pointed out that many contradictory results of seedsource studies could be related to raising planting stock of various
provenances in different nurseries. Their survival and rate of growth
were reflected in a different degree of significance. Stone and his coworker (8) found the same phenomenon in their study of ponderosa pine.
In the present study, all seedlings were raised in one nursery, so the
effect of a differential selective force by nurseries was avoided.
Few provenance tests have included seed from trees near the
plantings, and this circumstance made difficult comparing the growth
rates and adaptability of local and nonlocal races from early establishment to maturity. The present study provides such an opportunity, because more than half of the plantations were able to survive and furnish
valuable information for making such a comparison. Caution should be
exercised in interpreting results at this early stage, as these preliminary observations are based on only a few years' growth, and were not
derived from all provenance stocks from all plantations represented in
this study. Other experiments (9, 11) have indicated that a pattern of
early growth may be altered as trees under observation grow, although
study of growth in height of wind-pollinated progenies of ponderosa pine
(2) has shown that data on early growth can be useful in predicting future
growth.
19
LITERATURE CITED
1.
Baldwin, H. I. Forest Tree Seed. Chronica Botanica Co. 1942.
2. Callaham, R. Z., and A. A. Hasel. "Pinus Ponderosa, Height
Growth of Wind-pollinated Progenies." Silvae Genetica, Band 10,
Heft 2: 33-42. 1961.
3. Ching, Kim K., and D. N. Bever. "Provenance Study of Douglasfir in the Pacific Northwest Region. I. Nursery Performance."
Silvae Genetica, Band 9, Heft 1: 11-17. 1960.
4.
Munger, T. T., and William Morris. Growth of Douglas-fir Trees
of Known Seed Sources. U.S.D.A., Tech. Bul. No. 537. 1936.
5. Rohmeder, E. "Professor Miinchs Anbauversuch mit Douglasien
verschiedener Herkunft and andern Nadelbaumarten in Forstamt
Kaiserslautern - Ost. 1912 bis 1954." Z. Forstgenetik 5: 142156. 1956.
6.
Schober, R. Experiences with Douglas-fir in Euro e. Paper
presented at the World Consultation on Forest Genetics and
Tree Improvement. Stockholm, Sweden. 1963.
Douglas-fir in New Zealand Forest
Research Institute, New Zealand Forest Service. Technical Paper
7. Spurr, S. H. Observations on
No. 38. 1961.
8. Stone, E. C., and R. W. Benseler. "Planting Ponderosa Pine in
the California Pine Region." J. Forestry 60: 462-466. 1962.
9. Wakeley, P. C. "Results of the Southwide Pine Seed Source Study
through 1960-61." Sixth Southern Conference on Forest Tree
Improvement. 1961.
10. Wakeley, P. C. "Reducing the Effects of Nursery Influences Upon
Provenance Tests. SAFTIC-CSFTI." Forest Genetics Workshop
Proc. pp. 28-32.
1963.
11. Weidman, R. H. "Evidences of Racial Influence in a 25-year Test
Agr. Res. 59: 855-887. 1939.
of Ponderosa Pine."
12. Wallis, C. P., and J. V. Hofmann. "A Study of Douglas-fir Seed."
Proc. Soc. Amer. For. 10: 141-164. 1915.
20